Just a guess on my part, but it might be new. Doesn't the new version allow for direct interaction with the I-Tunes server, without a computer? I'm not sure the present model can do that, but what do I know. Anyway, it sounds like the existing apple TVs will work OK with it all.

Once somebody does get their hands on one (preferably one that ships with the new software already installed) can they post about whether it has gigabit ethernet on it?

I couldn't believe this oversight by Apple when it was first released!! For those of us with CAT 5e/6 homes this would have been so helpful.

This is kind of a moot point, as nothing the AppleTV will stream will even reach the 100 mbps limit. As long as you have a gigabit switch, that is all that matters. Today's 100bT chips can easily sustain >90 mbps.

Once somebody does get their hands on one (preferably one that ships with the new software already installed) can they post about whether it has gigabit ethernet on it?

I couldn't believe this oversight by Apple when it was first released!! For those of us with CAT 5e/6 homes this would have been so helpful.

This is kind of a moot point, as nothing the AppleTV will stream will even reach the 100 mbps limit. As long as you have a gigabit switch, that is all that matters. Today's 100bT chips can easily sustain >90 mbps.

Once somebody does get their hands on one (preferably one that ships with the new software already installed) can they post about whether it has gigabit ethernet on it?

I couldn't believe this oversight by Apple when it was first released!! For those of us with CAT 5e/6 homes this would have been so helpful.

This is kind of a moot point, as nothing the AppleTV will stream will even reach the 100 mbps limit. As long as you have a gigabit switch, that is all that matters. Today's 100bT chips can easily sustain >90 mbps.

What's the point of a giggy switch if the cards are only doing 100? The switching fabric on a 10/100 switch will easily feed any 10/100 card, giggy isn't needed. You're point still stands however, giggy is not needed to stream HD content.

Once somebody does get their hands on one (preferably one that ships with the new software already installed) can they post about whether it has gigabit ethernet on it?

I couldn't believe this oversight by Apple when it was first released!! For those of us with CAT 5e/6 homes this would have been so helpful.

This is kind of a moot point, as nothing the AppleTV will stream will even reach the 100 mbps limit. As long as you have a gigabit switch, that is all that matters. Today's 100bT chips can easily sustain >90 mbps.

What's the point of a giggy switch if the cards are only doing 100? The switching fabric on a 10/100 switch will easily feed any 10/100 card, giggy isn't needed. You're point still stands however, giggy is not needed to stream HD content.

So if it is meant to stream/display one data stream at a time, and no current commercial video/audio rate is even 1/2 of the AppleTV's max data rate, why does *not* having 1000bT even matter?

mini convert -

the necessity for a 1000bT switch is when you have more than 100 mbps of concurrent traffic.

if i have 3 100bT clients on a 100bT switch, and all are maxing out their connection, they each get 1/3 of 100 mbps.

on a 1000bT switch, each of these three 100bT clients would get a full 100 mbps and i would still have 700 mbps of unused bandwidth.

think of it like a highway, 1 100 mbps client could max a 100bT network, but it would take 10 100 mbps clients to max a 1000bT network.

No, your thinking is flawed and is based on hubs of old. Nobody buys hubs any more, everyone buys switches. With a HUB all ports shared the bandwidth, for the most part. With a switch, each port talks to the other at full wire speed. Now, it is true that cheaper switches will have a slower switching fabric but in a home environment you are unlikely to be affected by it. If you buy a gigabit switch and your clients are still using 10/100 cards you are seeing 0 benefit from the gigabit switch.

The one area the gigabit switch could help you is if your server is gigabit and you have several clients talking to it at the same time. In this case you would be correct._________________Intel Mac Mini, 1.83 C2D 2.5GB, 80GB, Combo Drive
Graphite G3 iMac DV SE, 400Mhz, 512MB, 30GB
iPod Touch (1st Gen)

the necessity for a 1000bT switch is when you have more than 100 mbps of concurrent traffic.

if i have 3 100bT clients on a 100bT switch, and all are maxing out their connection, they each get 1/3 of 100 mbps.

on a 1000bT switch, each of these three 100bT clients would get a full 100 mbps and i would still have 700 mbps of unused bandwidth.

think of it like a highway, 1 100 mbps client could max a 100bT network, but it would take 10 100 mbps clients to max a 1000bT network.

No, your thinking is flawed and is based on hubs of old. Nobody buys hubs any more, everyone buys switches. With a HUB all ports shared the bandwidth, for the most part. With a switch, each port talks to the other at full wire speed. Now, it is true that cheaper switches will have a slower switching fabric but in a home environment you are unlikely to be affected by it. If you buy a gigabit switch and your clients are still using 10/100 cards you are seeing 0 benefit from the gigabit switch.

The one area the gigabit switch could help you is if your server is gigabit and you have several clients talking to it at the same time. In this case you would be correct.

yeah, i was confused.

i was confusing myself in terms of multiple 100bT clients with 1000bT servers (my current set up at home). my apologies!